3 ms·

Imagine you read the fiction where the only way for heroes to express their feelings is to utter word "fuck". How long would you read it? The prose by Watts is

by thesz 8y ago

Imagine you read the fiction where the only way for heroes to express their feelings is to utter word "fuck". How long would you read it? The prose by Watts is so much against my life, hobby, sports and work experience that at some point of time I started read his work as something like this: "some uninteresting rant, fuck you, Serguey, some more pseudointellectual babble". I even started to re-research what I knew because I looked to myself so very wrong with what I considered correct and right. This is quite an achievement on Watts behalf. And no, I cannot imagine how Watts would be able to satisfy me with the necessity for humans to enter that alien ship. In my opinion, it does not follow because of so many things before.

Apocryphon 8y ago
You seem to be projecting more upon the material than it is there. Watts is essentially a modern Michael Crichton with the misanthropy and body horror of H.P. Lovecraft. There's not a lot of profundity to be expected in his novels. There probably is no such thing as truly hard sci-fi, as all speculative stories involves handwaving the details, but you seem to be expecting a level of hardness that you won't find in Watts work, or in most fiction.
- thesz 8y ago
  Others keep calling Watts a "hard sci-fi author" and his work as "hard science fiction". The "hard science fiction", as I learned being young adult, must present as less fictional hypotheses as possible, the minimum is none and reasonable requirement is one per short story or short novel. Watts keeps providing assumptions at the rate of one per ten pages, to exaggerate a bit. I do not share your cultural background and 1) know nothing about Crichton and 2) do not love Lovecraft. But I remember reading translation of Martian Chronicles by Bradbury and he succeed with body horror in my opinion, to the point that I profoundly dislike his work up to this day. He wrote hard sci fi (without quotes - single assumption per short story) and to great success. Again, I consider Watts a bad author with more or less interesting ideas - I keep arguing about them with others and myself. But I will not consume any new piece of his work because, in my opinion, they are very badly executed.

by thesz 8y ago

Apocryphon 8y ago

You seem to be projecting more upon the material than it is there. Watts is essentially a modern Michael Crichton with the misanthropy and body horror of H.P. Lovecraft. There's not a lot of profundity to be expected in his novels. There probably is no such thing as truly hard sci-fi, as all speculative stories involves handwaving the details, but you seem to be expecting a level of hardness that you won't find in Watts work, or in most fiction.

thesz 8y ago
Others keep calling Watts a "hard sci-fi author" and his work as "hard science fiction". The "hard science fiction", as I learned being young adult, must present as less fictional hypotheses as possible, the minimum is none and reasonable requirement is one per short story or short novel. Watts keeps providing assumptions at the rate of one per ten pages, to exaggerate a bit. I do not share your cultural background and 1) know nothing about Crichton and 2) do not love Lovecraft. But I remember reading translation of Martian Chronicles by Bradbury and he succeed with body horror in my opinion, to the point that I profoundly dislike his work up to this day. He wrote hard sci fi (without quotes - single assumption per short story) and to great success. Again, I consider Watts a bad author with more or less interesting ideas - I keep arguing about them with others and myself. But I will not consume any new piece of his work because, in my opinion, they are very badly executed.